| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| Guest9184 |
Posted - 04/30/2012 : 15:14:22
Who should win the Jack Adams Award? |
| 9 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| ryan93 |
Posted - 05/02/2012 : 06:21:24
quote:
Originally posted by JOSHUACANADA
As a Sens fan you would expect I would vote Maclean. Nope, Hitchcock has made the most in Season difference for his team. Always impressive what Hitchcock can add to a team. Blues may have been on the radar but it wasn't pretty. I will say all of the coaches mentioned for the Jack deserve a huge credit to there name for what they have accomplished this year.
Same. As much as I'd like to see Torts win it, I too voted for Ken Hitchcock. |
| n/a |
Posted - 05/02/2012 : 05:15:14
For me, both the Blues and Sens were just as surprising in where they ended up at the end of the year. Just going by team performance . . . it's neck and neck.
What I like to do though, is compare how "player oriented" this surprise was, in terms of guys having career years, etc. I realise that this is married in some respects to how the coach is coaching these guys to career highs and great years; but, it's all I've got really.
So based on that, It's Hitchcock all the way. I can say that Ottawa greatly benefited from Alfie's and Spezza's resurgent years, Karlsson's career year, Michalek's great year, and Anderson's great year, etc etc. I also look to how Ottawa, despite having a shoddy defensive game (as we knew they would have), outscored a lot of their problems, which is why they ended up in the playoffs.
The Blues, on the other hand, maybe had a career year from Elliot, and that is about it. And those amazing stats that Elliot and Halak put up, can be greatly attributed to the stifling and air-tight defence that Hitch instituted, I think.
So I think it's Hitchcock here, with certainly a tip of the hat to MacLean.
I can't stand Torts, and think he's an average coach at best, so . . . 'nuff said.
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug |
| Shepsky |
Posted - 05/02/2012 : 04:18:32
St. Louis might have been on the radar, maybe to sneak into a playoff spot, but to finish near the top of the league? I don't think anyone predicted that, and to take a goalie like Brian Elliot (let's admit it,. he isn't a great goalie) and have him finish the league first place in GAA and SV% speaks a TON about the defensive system that Hitch was able to put in place, that is why Hitch is without a doubt the adams winner in my mind.
Every day is a great day for hockey
-Mario Lemieux |
| mandree888 |
Posted - 05/01/2012 : 14:57:40
no lunchbox WHY???!!!! rofl too funny |
| Lunchbox |
Posted - 05/01/2012 : 14:13:56
If Hitch doesn't win this, it would be the biggest mistake in the history of the award... |
| JOSHUACANADA |
Posted - 05/01/2012 : 13:45:50
As a Sens fan you would expect I would vote Maclean. Nope, Hitchcock has made the most in Season difference for his team. Always impressive what Hitchcock can add to a team. Blues may have been on the radar but it wasn't pretty. I will say all of the coaches mentioned for the Jack deserve a huge credit to there name for what they have accomplished this year. |
| semin-rules |
Posted - 05/01/2012 : 11:33:18
How Kevin Dineen didn't get a nomination is simply astonishing |
| HawkinOilCountry |
Posted - 05/01/2012 : 09:03:27
Actually it is something that absolutely will be ignored. Playoff performance has zero bearing on the Jack Adams award.
Having said that, you really can't go wrong with Hitchcock or Maclean. Both of them have play HUGE roles in their teams' success.
I'm shocked that Trotz is snubbed once again though.
The arena wall in chicago should be credited with a goal. |
| mandree888 |
Posted - 05/01/2012 : 08:35:55
this was a tough one. i went with the senators (WOW did i just say that)
only because everyone thought the sens were gonna be where columbus is!!
everyone knew that the blues had the balance in their team to be effective. hitchcock just focused the effectivness.
mclean took a team that no one had on the radar and took the number 1 seed in the east to game 7..... that is not something you can ignore. |
